Deal with multiple clients and only one transport in tick42blp bridge
|
macrux
Hi there, I'm working with Bloomberg and the tick42blp bridge, and I have an application which starts multiple clients, each one in a different thread, and each one can be subscribed to different subjects. I had a problem, when the second client started, it failed because the transport with that name (blp_tport) had been already created when the first client started. Then I decided to make the transport static so all clients can use the same instance, but I am not able to destroy the transport until the last client is closed, otherwise, clients that are using the transport will fail.Thanks in advance for any help you could give me. Kind regards, Nestor. |
|
|
|
Tom Doust
Hi Nestor
I think there is nothing inherent in OpenMAMA that prevents you from creating and running multiple instances of the same transport. I have demonstrated this with the Tick42 TREP bridge.
Your second solution is not ideal because the single static transport is only going to maintain a single connection (and thread) to Bloomberg.
Using your first solution (which I believe is the correct way to go) , where did it fail ?
Best regards
Tom
From: openmama-users-bounces@... [mailto:openmama-users-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Macrux
Sent: 29 March 2016 15:52 To: openmama-dev@...; openmama-users@... Subject: [Openmama-users] Deal with multiple clients and only one transport in tick42blp bridge
Hi there, I'm working with Bloomberg and the tick42blp bridge, and I have an application which starts multiple clients, each one in a different thread, and each one can be subscribed to different subjects. I had a problem, when the second client started, it failed because the transport with that name (blp_tport) had been already created when the first client started. Then I decided to make the transport static so all clients can use the same instance, but I am not able to destroy the transport until the last client is closed, otherwise, clients that are using the transport will fail. My question is if this is the correct approach to deal with this situation, or there is a better one?
Thanks in advance for any help you could give me. Kind regards, Nestor. |
|
|